• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cowardly Canadians

MaggieD said:
Perhaps we should keep in mind the history of The Trojan Horse.

I personally wouldn't think much about our policy of come-one come-all in this situation. But BUT I have been appalled at our government ridiculing those with concerns rather than reassuring them.
Click to expand...

You want to base immigration policy for refugees on a Greek tale from the Trojan War?

Our concern is either trusting the process of handling refugees into a nation or not. If you trust the process then you handle all applicants with the same standards for screening, if you do not trust the process then no one should be allowed in. It is one or the other.

But, this method of taking "unaccompanied males" and eliminating them from consideration on that standard only is discriminatory. Why am I the only one that can see how asinine this discussion has become?
 
OrphanSlug said:
You want to base immigration policy for refugees on a Greek tale from the Trojan War?

Our concern is either trusting the process of handling refugees into a nation or not. If you trust the process then you handle all applicants with the same standards for screening, if you do not trust the process then no one should be allowed in. It is one or the other.

But, this method of taking "unaccompanied males" and eliminating them from consideration on that standard only is discriminatory. Why am I the only one that can see how asinine this discussion has become?
Click to expand...

The number of people who want to turn away all refugees is quite disturbing..
 
OrphanSlug said:
You want to base immigration policy for refugees on a Greek tale from the Trojan War?

Our concern is either trusting the process of handling refugees into a nation or not. If you trust the process then you handle all applicants with the same standards for screening, if you do not trust the process then no one should be allowed in. It is one or the other.

But, this method of taking "unaccompanied males" and eliminating them from consideration on that standard only is discriminatory. Why am I the only one that can see how asinine this discussion has become?
Click to expand...

you're knot.

I can understand the concern, but they don't seem to think that both women and children can be terrorists too. There have been child suicide bombers as young as 14, as well as women suicide bombers too.
 
Well thats a damn shame. So a single man who lost his family who is a refugee wont even be thought about being selected? Damn shame...
 
David_N said:
Oh, it is a question of fear, considering:
These 3 charts show homegrown terrorists are a bigger threat than refugees - Vox
This Chart Is The Perfect Rebuttal To Governors Who Won't Take In Syrian Refugees | ThinkProgress
Click to expand...
I don't think that the first link shows what you think it shows. According to the US census, in 2012, the latest data they have for this, there were 268.9 million native born US citizens, 17.9 million naturalized citizens, and 22.0 million other. So, the US born commit 0.5 acts per million, naturalized commit 3.97 per million, and other commit 3.7 acts per million. So US born commit about 1/7 the number, per capita. But the alarming thing is that only 1% are Moslems, 2.6 million, and they commit 314 acts, or 121 acts per million. By definition, jihadists would be Moslems.

Even added in the "right wing terrorists", whatever that means, still US very few terrorist activities are done by US born.

Sad that your link shows 4 US terrorists acts between 2002 and 2008 and 22 since. Something made things get worse.
 
David_N said:
The number of people who want to turn away all refugees is quite disturbing..
Click to expand...

I would find it acceptable to not trust the process of vetting refugees as a whole, as most nations have some qualifier for deciding who does and does not meet the standard for that sort of admittance to a nation. I do not mind a debate on looking at how we determine who is a refugee and who is an ISIS plant. We can be vigilant without making mistakes that end up making us look even worse than we did yesterday. What I mind is sweeping discrimination standards that all fly in the face of lessons we should have learned over a long history of looking at people based on country of origin, or sex, or race, or some other standard as being an inherent problem on those standards only.

It is like I woke up today to face thinking from the 1950s disguised as immigration policy for refugees from Syria.
 
MaggieD said:
Hilarious? Really? its not a question of fear. It's a question of prudence.

Edit: What kind of right talk do you listen to that ridicules the feminist movement and advocates hatred of men? Get better taste in your reading material. Lordy.
Click to expand...

It is a question of fear- the Middle East has a long history of female fighters and suicide bombers, do you think IF (and it's a HUGE if) but if the terrorists are using refugees to attack the West, don't you think they would recruit females- dye their hair and dress them Western to enter the host nations?

That was a big worry after 9/11- a female suicide team attacking a jet.

So excluding single males will do little for our security except give us some more 'security theater'.

I do agree with your edit... :peace
 
OrphanSlug said:
You want to base immigration policy for refugees on a Greek tale from the Trojan War?

Our concern is either trusting the process of handling refugees into a nation or not. If you trust the process then you handle all applicants with the same standards for screening, if you do not trust the process then no one should be allowed in. It is one or the other.

But, this method of taking "unaccompanied males" and eliminating them from consideration on that standard only is discriminatory. Why am I the only one that can see how asinine this discussion has become?
Click to expand...

You're the poster who said we needed to look at history, no?

This discussion became ASININE when the POTUS did not address screening concerns like an adult.
 
notquiteright said:
It is a question of fear- the Middle East has a long history of female fighters and suicide bombers, do you think IF (and it's a HUGE if) but if the terrorists are using refugees to attack the West, don't you think they would recruit females- dye their hair and dress them Western to enter the host nations?

That was a big worry after 9/11- a female suicide team attacking a jet.

So excluding single males will do little for our security except give us some more 'security theater'.

I do agree with your edit... :peace
Click to expand...

I agree with much of what you're saying. To me, those who are against this intake of refugees needed reassurance re the screening process rather than haranguing them for their cruelty. And, of course, your sentence re excluding males...yes, perception is reality.
 
MaggieD said:
You're the poster who said we needed to look at history, no?

This discussion became ASININE when the POTUS did not address screening concerns like an adult.
Click to expand...

So if you do not trust the process, then why only single out unaccompanied males?
 
Why not look at Canada's overall immigration policies and Canada's history of diversity and inclusion before we begin throwing rocks at Canada? In fact, don't we have enough to work on here in the United States?

I don't understand our national penchant for ****ing with every other country on earth.
 
Gee I wonder why people are scared of Muslims.. What reason would they have to be scared of them? lol
 
OrphanSlug said:
So if you do not trust the process, then why only single out unaccompanied males?
Click to expand...

Honestly, I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. People don't trust the process because they don't understand the process. I didn't single out unaccompanied males, for heaven's sake, the Canadian GOVERNMENT did. Ask them.
 
MaggieD said:
(Sarcasm, CanadaJohn and others)

Canada's Syrian refugee plan limited to women, children and families - Politics - CBC News

Canada is taking in 25,000 Syrian refugees. No unaccompanied males. Imagine that. How silly...how dispassionate...horrible of them.

Not.
Click to expand...

Good evening Maggie,

Several days ago on a DP thread I said they should do just that - perhaps my Canadian Liberal friends came to their senses after reading my post or perhaps the Canadian government saw it and recognized the wisdom!!
 
MaggieD said:
(Sarcasm, CanadaJohn and others)

Canada's Syrian refugee plan limited to women, children and families - Politics - CBC News

Canada is taking in 25,000 Syrian refugees. No unaccompanied males. Imagine that. How silly...how dispassionate...horrible of them.

Not.
Click to expand...
I agree that the Canadians are brilliant on this issue and hopefully BHO will do the same thing, if anything.

It is precisely the single Muslim males who become radicalized.

Angela Merkel is going to find out that she acted too soon and was too generous.

Germany is probably going to continue to be a Muslim terrorist rat hole.

That's bad news for France and the UK.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Good evening Maggie,

Several days ago on a DP thread I said they should do just that - perhaps my Canadian Liberal friends came to their senses after reading my post or perhaps the Canadian government saw it and recognized the wisdom!!
Click to expand...

One can only hope.

Now let's all pray that BHO realizes the same thing.
 
David_N said:
I've constantly heard many on the right talk about the "ridiculous" feminist movement and a hatred of men. Why aren't they complaining about this? Unaccompanied males are in the minority, and I find it hilarious that we're all scared of refugee males.
Click to expand...

Have you seen photos and video of refugees flooding into Europe? Pretty much nothing but young single males with a few women and children sprinkled in. Canada doesn't need that nightmare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom